Should Paficism be employed???? HELP!?

I%26#039;m in a debate team and need some arguements. Paficism is peacefull people. Like Martian Luther King. Or Gandhi. I need some arguements that would be helpful for the yes side or the side that want paficism to be taken by people.
Should Paficism be employed???? HELP!?
yes
Should Paficism be employed???? HELP!?
Pacifism dear
Reply:Pacifist believe that everything can be solved by conversation and understanding of the opponent%26#039;s position. They believe war is useless and harms too many people - especially innocent civilians.


I agree with them - violence is not a solution. A world would be a terrible, terrible place if we would solve every problem with a fist or a gun.
Reply:Yes: less violence, more understanding, more humane behavior.





No: avarice and republicans
Reply:Daisaku Ikeda gave a speech at Harvard in 1994 on Soft Power. Google his name. You will find a wealth of information. Ikeda is the world%26#039;s foremost peace advocate and has over 200 honorary doctorates from places like Oxford so he deserves attention.
Reply:Pacifism like any military strategy often relies on the skill of the General.





The New testament suggests that Christians should be as gentle as lambs but as sly as foxes.





Pacifism is generally a long term strategy.





Often times a mixture of violence and peace such as that used by Alexander The Great, is more powerful than pure violence. Any violence requires some cooperation from ones victims. If the greedy take their desires with violence they can expect that the favor will be returned when they show weakness.





When Alexander died his empire fought amongst itself to its destruction.





If I had the money and lives spent on the War in Iraq, I believe I could have had more sucess pacifying Iraq through pacifism than Bush had using his shock and awe.





On the other hand if Gengus Kaan, Rockefella, or Alexander had Bush%26#039;s war machines they would likely have had a resounding victory.





The question of pacifism is like the debate on spanking. A clever parent or teacher will be able to control children using only selective rewards. My brother however quickly learned that stealing was wrong when our father caught him stealing, and applied a heavy handed method of impressing his lesson.





Loving your enemies will eventually gain you genuine friends. Violence on the other hand encourages more violence. If all the money and lives spent on US warfare was diverted into quality of life for citizens, and development of potential trading partners, there would be less need for army or police to maintain order.





If the US army went in unarmed and carried flowers instead of bullets they would have likely lost less lives and had better results winning hearts and minds.





Warfare is a self fulfilling prophesy. The more violence you use and the bigger the guns you get the more angry your enemies will get and the bigger the guns they will want to feel secure; leading to a feud and arms race.
Reply:no.


pacifism is bad for weapon manufacturers.